U.S. Analyst Depicts Al Qaeda as Secure in Pakistan and More Potent Than Last Year

AndrewC · 08-13-08, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Al Qaeda’s success in forging close ties to Pakistani militant groups has given it an increasingly secure haven in the mountainous tribal areas of Pakistan, the American government’s senior terrorism analyst said Tuesday.

Al Qaeda is more capable of attacking inside the United States than it was last year, and its cadre of senior leaders has recruited and trained “dozens” of militants capable of blending into Western society to carry out attacks, the analyst said.

The remarks Tuesday by the intelligence analyst, Ted Gistaro, were the most comprehensive assessment of the Qaeda threat by an American official since the National Intelligence Estimate issued last summer, which concluded that Al Qaeda had largely rebuilt its haven in Pakistan’s tribal areas.

A year later, Mr. Gistaro said, the problem has only grown worse, in part because of a symbiotic relationship between Qaeda operatives and Pakistani militant groups based in the tribal areas.

“It is a stronger, more comfortable safe haven than it was for them a year ago,” said Mr. Gistaro, who supervises all intelligence reports on terrorism at the National Intelligence Council. He made his remarks in a speech here to the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Al Qaeda’s growing strength inside Pakistan has in recent months prompted new discussions in the Bush administration about using special-operations troops for raids in the tribal areas — an option the White House has long resisted because of the risks.

There is also a growing recognition among senior officials that the Bush administration for years did not take the Qaeda threat in Pakistan seriously enough and relied on President Pervez Musharraf to dismantle networks of militants there.

...

American military and intelligence officials believe that Pakistani militant networks are engaged in an increasingly violent campaign inside Afghanistan, attacking American and coalition troops as well as civilian targets like the Indian Embassy in Kabul, which a suicide bomber attacked last month.

American spy agencies have also concluded that officers in Pakistan’s powerful Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, which has long maintained ties to militants in the tribal areas, helped carry out the embassy bombing.

If the greatest threat to America is AQ and a 9/11 style attack. Why haven't we done more to stop AQ? Wrap up Iraq, quit fighting Afghans that only care about attacking Afghanistan and focus on the threat to American soil. The taliban and pakistan can't stop us from operating within their borders. We don't need to occupy. We need to clean house and leave. Quick and as clean as possible.

Tashah · 08-13-08, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewC

If the greatest threat to America is AQ and a 9/11 style attack. Why haven't we done more to stop AQ?

Resources were prematurely diverted to Iraq.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewC

Wrap up Iraq, quit fighting Afghans that only care about attacking Afghanistan and focus on the threat to American soil.

Sorry, but I really don’t know what you are saying here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewC

The taliban and pakistan can't stop us from operating within their borders. We don't need to occupy. We need to clean house and leave. Quick and as clean as possible.

The autonomous areas adjoining Afghanistan and Pakistan are ruled by warlords and tribal sheiks. This territory is extremely difficult to traverse and the indiginous population is inclined to support fellow Pashtuns and Sunni Muslims. There is no such thing here as a quick in-and-out victory.

AndrewC · 08-13-08, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tashah

The autonomous areas adjoining Afghanistan and Pakistan are ruled by warlords and tribal sheiks. This territory is extremely difficult to traverse and the indiginous population is inclined to support fellow Pashtuns and Sunni Muslims. There is no such thing here as a quick in-and-out victory.

There is a quicker way to attack AQ than by first trying to secure Kabul and remove an indiginous people from their land. I don't like the taliban, but they live in afghanistan. We could move into this region and handle business. There is no need to occupy afghanistan or pakistan territory. There is no need for nation building. They went to kabul when they should have went to the border with pakistan.

Tashah · 08-13-08, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewC

There is a quicker way to attack AQ than by first trying to secure Kabul and remove an indiginous people from their land.

Who is removing an indiginous people from their land? What people are being removed?

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewC

I don't like the taliban, but they live in afghanistan.

The Taliban exist in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewC

We could move into this region and handle business. There is no need to occupy afghanistan or pakistan territory. There is no need for nation building. They went to kabul when they should have went to the border with pakistan.

There is no getting back today what was squandered at Tora Bora. The West today cannot afford to abandon Afghanistan and leave it to the Talibs, warlords, and drug smugglers. I would suggest that you familiarize yourself with the mountainous regions and Helmand Province in Afghanistan, and the Northwest Frontier Province and the Peshawar area in Pakistan. This is precisely where the crux of the AQ/Taliban problem exists.

AndrewC · 08-13-08, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tashah

Who is removing an indiginous people from their land? What people are being removed?

The Taliban exist in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

There is no getting back today what was squandered at Tora Bora. The West today cannot afford to abandon Afghanistan and leave it to the Talibs, warlords, and drug smugglers. I would suggest that you familiarize yourself with the mountainous regions and Helmand Province in Afghanistan, and the Northwest Frontier Province and the Peshawar area in Pakistan. This is precisely where the crux of the AQ/Taliban problem exists.

I disagree. AQ isn't about Afghanistan. What happens to Afghan proper doesn't matter. Aq moves to north Africa, Europe and other nations. It doesn't matter to them where they move. The taliban primarily care about Afghanistan. Let them have it. They can't stop us from hunting terrorists in Afghanistan. That is what really matters.

Tashah · 08-13-08, 02:53 PM

First off, you didn't answer my question about who is being removed from Afghanistan. You made the statement, now amplify on it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewC

I disagree. AQ isn't about Afghanistan. What happens to Afghan proper doesn't matter. Aq moves to north Africa, Europe and other nations. It doesn't matter to them where they move.

Of course AQ is an international terrorist organization. But to ignore that AQ is primarily based in the lawless regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan is to ignore reality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewC

The taliban primarily care about Afghanistan. Let them have it. They can't stop us from hunting terrorists in Afghanistan. That is what really matters.

I don't think so. AQ and the Taliban are aligned in a confederation with many of the same local and global goals. One does not simply cede a nation to an Islamist organization that shelters AQ and fights shoulder to shoulder together.

AndrewC · 08-13-08, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tashah

First off, you didn't answer my question about who is being removed from Afghanistan. You made the statement, now amplify on it.

Of course AQ is an international terrorist organization. But to ignore that AQ is primarily based in the lawless regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan is to ignore reality.

I don't think so. AQ and the Taliban are aligned in a confederation with many of the same local and global goals. One does not simply cede a nation to an Islamist organization that shelters AQ and fights shoulder to shoulder together.

The taliban have been removed (actually just moved). I said nothing about ignoring the lawless regions. I said we should forget kabul and go to the lawless region. Not to build a nation, but to kill or capture the few that want to attack American soil. I do not want to waste resources fighting a war for Afghanistan or Pakistan. It does not help America. This report shows that. All these years and AQ just moves and keeps on with business as usual.

GySgt · 08-13-08, 04:02 PM

Military and cultural analysts have been predicting that Al-Queda would move into Pakistan and the HOA for security for years. They were always correct and this enforces the neccessity to deny them safe havens in Iraq and other places where religious terror can find a home. With the Iraq and Afghanistan option off the table, they must seek other environments. Saudi Arabia won't stand for it. Turkey will deny their radical Arab presence. Jordan will not tolerate them after their clear intent to kill fellow Muslims in Jordan and Iraq. Lebanon only has room for one tribe's militant group. Syria has a habit of policing their fanatics to extreme prejudice. Egypt is too "Westernized." Afghanistan and Iraq are traveled too far down the path of democracy and their local populations have seen first hand what fate awaits Muslims under their care. And Iran has no space available for Arab fanatics. This leaves Pakistan and some remote areas in the HOA and Asia. They can't even find solid ground in Somalia these days with the African Union hunting them down.

GySgt · 08-13-08, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewC

All these years and AQ just moves and keeps on with business as usual.

And when they run out of places to move? When they have no fanatic host element in these countries to harbor them? Iraq is largely in a better place these days, because the fanatics and militias started running out of places to go. As Security forces stood up, more locations were under protection and their havens were denied so they couldn't sweep right back in when we left. The same is true for Al-Queda on the international stage. With Iraq and Afghanistan moving forward, where does this leave Al-Queda to hide? With the rest of the Middle Eastern nations completely aware of what Al-Queda does to its own Muslims, is Pakistan the last big fanatical haven for them?

This analysis proves what many have been predicting all along.

AndrewC · 08-13-08, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GySgt

And when they run out of places to move? When they have no fanatic host element in these countries to harbor them? Iraq is largely in a better place these days, because the fanatics and militias started running out of places to go. As Security forces stood up, more locations were under protection and their havens were denied so they couldn't sweep right back in when we left. The same is true for Al-Queda on the international stage. With Iraq and Afghanistan moving forward, where does this leave Al-Queda to hide? With the rest of the Middle Eastern nations completely aware of what Al-Queda does to its own Muslims, is Pakistan the last big fanatical haven for them?

This analysis proves what many have been predicting all along.

I believe the media calls this whack-a-mole. I'm not entirely thrilled with that anology, but it does illustrate the challenge. Instead of hunting those that want to attack America we are nation building. It seems so much simpler and easier just to catch or kill the problem people. Instead of occupying or making shady deals with every government in the middle east and Africa.

I just seems that if you sat down and rationally looked at 9/11. If you tried to draw up a plan that was effective and efficient. The strategy we chose to follow would be its exact opposite.

To me, and perhaps you disagree, our current strategy depends on some day there being peace and prosperity throughout the Muslim world. That somehow when democracy blossoms terrorism will die at its roots. This is extremely idealist and grand. We've been working with (and against) Muslims for decades. When is the payoff? Everyone keeps saying, "it's just around the corner. You'll see." I don't buy it.